The Last Play against the Bucs - illegal?

[BisonMan]

Gents,

 

In watching the last multi-lateral play against the Bucs, I noticed during the play that a few of the lateral pitches/passes hit the turf before being picked up and advanced by Bucs' players. I thought that any time the ball hits the turf, it's technically a fumble (intentional or not). If that's true and the play happened within the last two minutes of the game, the refs should have blown the whistle as soon as another player besides the one that "fumbled" picked up the ball.

 

This is similar to the safety the Bills got against Aaron Rodgers in the end zone a couple of years ago. Rodgers fumbled the ball and another Packer picked it up. The Refs immediately blew the whistle indicating a dead ball at the spot of the recovery (in the end zone) causing a safety.

 

So, shouldn't the last play by the Bucs have been ruled down as soon as the ball skipped off the turf from one player to another. I don't see how "intent" to skip it could be in the rule and thereby this should be a fumble.

 

Thoughts? I may be out to lunch on this one in not understanding the rule. The announcers never said a peep about this during the game. I haven't seen anything on this in the press/web either.

[The Dean]

I'm not completely clear on the rule. But I was under the impression it's only in effect for fumbles into the end zone, with under 2 min left. Then again, I could be full of crap.

[KD in CA]

Doesn't that only apply to balls fumbled forward, a la the Raiders Holy Roller play?

Edited October 27, 2017 by KD in CA

[Augie]

If it’s lateral, it’s a live ball, right?

[Dragonborn10]

Only affects balls fumbled forward and I think only in the last minutes of the game though that rule may have changed to the entire game. Yes a lateral is a live ball. A Bill could have scooped it up and scored.

 

As an aside, has anyone seen the injury to Poyer? Was it a dirty hit? How did he get injured?

[BisonMan]

Doesn't that only apply to balls fumbled forward, a la the Raiders Holy Roller play?

The rule applies to any play within 2 minutes left in either half. It doesn't apply at other times. The Ravens scored a TD tonight on a ball fumbled forward into the end zone ("holy roller"). It just wasn't in the last 2 minutes of a half.

 

It definitely applies to balls "fumbled" backward as happened in the Packer's game against the Bills. As soon as another Packer picked up the ball, the play was blown dead at the site of the recovery. Safety for the Bills!

 

http://www.buffalobills.com/video/videos/30_Blitz_Bucs_vs_Bills/497360e6-6972-423e-8ae8-750ae7e43d55

 

So, I'm still unclear as to how a "lateral" that hits the ground is not a fumble. Could you not claim that any ball hitting the ground was a "lateral"? Clearly, there must be some language of "intent" in the rule to allow a ball hitting the ground behind the spot the player released to be ruled a lateral ("he meant to do that") vs. a fumble ("he didn't intent to do that").

 

I just don't know the rule well enough and need some clarification.

Edited October 27, 2017 by BisonMan

[Big Turk]

Those weren't fumbles they were laterals.

 

Laterals are when you voluntary relinquish possession of the football, which is obviously what they were doing.

[BisonMan]

Those weren't fumbles they were laterals.

Laterals are when you voluntary relinquish possession of the football, which is obviously what they were doing.

So, the player's intent is the key here? Imagine a QB being taken down at the end of a game and he throws the ball backward toward a teammate. It bounces off the turf and the lineman picks it up and scores. This would be legal based on the refs interpretation of the QBs intent, right?

 

Strange rule. I can't think of other "intent" rules in the game aside from certain personal fouls.

[Big Turk]

So, the player's intent is the key here? Imagine a QB being taken down at the end of a game and he throws the ball backward toward a teammate. It bounces off the turf and the lineman picks it up and scores. This would be legal based on the refs interpretation of the QBs intent, right?

 

Strange rule. I can't think of other "intent" rules in the game aside from certain personal fouls.

Yes, intent is key there. Possibly, yes. I'm not sure because I dont think we have ever seen it happen in a game tho.

[BisonMan]

Yes, intent is key there. Possibly, yes. I'm not sure because I dont think we have ever seen it happen in a game tho.

Yes, this was the first time I'd ever seen a team bounce laterals on the last play of the game. I've seen players being tackled try to lateral and the ball hitting the turf being ruled dead under the rule.

[The Dean]

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/fumble

 

 

Fumble

1. The distinction between a fumble and a muff should be kept in mind in considering rules about fumbles. A fumble is the loss of player possession of the ball. A muff is the touching of a loose ball by a player in an unsuccessful attempt to obtain possession.
2. A fumble may be advanced by any player on either team regardless of whether recovered before or after ball hits the ground.
3. A fumble that goes forward and out of bounds will return to the fumbling team at the spot of the fumble unless the ball goes out of bounds in the opponent’s end zone. In this case, it is a touchback.
4. On a play from scrimmage, if an offensive player fumbles anywhere on the field during fourth down, only the fumbling player is permitted to recover and/or advance the ball. If any player fumbles after the two-minute warning in a half, only the fumbling player is permitted to recover and/or advance the ball. If recovered by any other offensive player, the ball is dead at the spot of the fumble unless it is recovered behind the spot of the fumble. In that case, the ball is dead at the spot of recovery. Any defensive player may recover and/or advance any fumble at any time.
5. A muffed hand-to-hand snap from center is treated as a fumble.

 

 

Edited October 27, 2017 by The Dean

[Big Turk]

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/fumble

 

 

Once again. Lateralling the ball is NOT a fumble, at least in terms of the end of the game rule, even though it is counted as a fumble in the official stats. Edited October 27, 2017 by matter2003

[The Dean]

Once again. Lateralling the ball is NOT a fumble, at least in terms of the end of the game rule, even though it is counted as a fumble in the official stats.

 

 

Who would argue that lateraling the ball is a fumble? But if it hits the ground, what else is it?

[BisonMan]

Who would argue that lateraling the ball is a fumble? But if it hits the ground, what else is it?

This is my point. If a player attempts a lateral and it bounces and a defender gets it before an offensive player, it's a fumble recovery. How can you recover a fumble that wasn't a fumble?

 

I still think a bounced lateral attempt is a fumble.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

No. It was not. Otherwise Captain Obvious would have blown his whistle.

 

sorry for the sarcasm.

[mead107]

why is it Last play AGINST the bucs?

[Gugny]

why is it Last play AGINST the bucs?

 

Because the Bills were playing the Bucs and it was the last play of the game.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

why is it Last play AGINST the bucs?

tomato tomato

 

(insert pronunciation as needed)

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

On Monday morning, one of the talk radio shows was talking about the impact of the multiple fumbles on that play. They indicated the Bucs were recorded as having 4, I think on that play.

Edited October 27, 2017 by leh-nerd skin-erd

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

On Monday morning, one of the talk radio shows was talking about the impact of the multiple fumbles on that play. They indicated the Bucs were recorded as having 4, I think on that play.

I think the correct # was 3.

FWIW